From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 09:52:57 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD06132C33B
for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 09:52:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-87-180.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.87.180] helo=defaulttg3zjxw)
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CPln4-0004iG-R3
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:52:55 -0500
Message-ID: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:53:11 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-1, 03/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/1
X-Sequence-Number: 1810
hello everyone,
I'm running a mailing list manager using the sendmail binary for
outgoing mail, because smtp is too restricted to make the 300+
zubscriber base workable.
Trouble is, when people mail the list they get a 'personal' mail
delivery error from the mail daemon if there happen to be any dead or
over quota addresses on the list at that time. Using smtp (on smaller
lists) seems not to do this.
So, is there a specific request I can send to the hosting support to get
these mail delivery errors specifically directed to an admin address?
ie, 'if a delivery error is generated when someone has originally mailed
to xyzlist then forward to admin@xyz rather than the original sender' ....
I'm asking here before contacting the host in case any of you have tried
this before and found it definitely is / is not possible to set up.
many thanks,
Lee
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 12:01:28 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from ultra7.eskimo.com (ultra7.eskimo.com [204.122.16.70])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E4AB32C450
for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:01:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from big-dog.dogswood.com (dialport38.west.eskimo.net [67.136.137.135])
by ultra7.eskimo.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iA4Jrl6p013431
for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:53:49 -0800
Received: (from jimo@localhost)
by big-dog.dogswood.com (8.11.6/8.11.6/SuSE Linux 0.5) id iA4JnDr17213
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:49:13 -0800
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:49:12 -0800
From: Jim Osborn
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
Message-ID: <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com>
Mail-Followup-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-Archive-Number: 200411/2
X-Sequence-Number: 1811
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 5:53:11PM +0000, lee wrote:
> I'm running a mailing list manager using the sendmail binary for
> outgoing mail, because smtp is too restricted to make the 300+
> zubscriber base workable.
>
> Trouble is, when people mail the list they get a 'personal' mail
> delivery error from the mail daemon if there happen to be any dead or
> over quota addresses on the list at that time. Using smtp (on smaller
> lists) seems not to do this.
Others here can probably quote the RFCs on this better than me, but I'll
offer my limited opinion. First, those errors you mention should never
go to the message author, but should instead go to the envelope sender,
or return-path, which should be the MLM. I don't know if this is a
sendmail/smtp issue or just an issue with your MLM. Then again, there
are plenty of sites that misdirect DSNs even with the MLM set up right.
> So, is there a specific request I can send to the hosting support to get
> these mail delivery errors specifically directed to an admin address?
> ie, 'if a delivery error is generated when someone has originally mailed
> to xyzlist then forward to admin@xyz rather than the original sender' ....
Here's a sampling of the headers this list, list-managers, emits:
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 10:00:21 2004
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Message-ID: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:53:11 +0000
From: lee
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
Sender: list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com
A site would have to be really misconfigured to send DSNs to the From:
address with all that info at hand. You might check to see what your
current MLM is sending in the way of headers.
> I'm asking here before contacting the host in case any of you have tried
> this before and found it definitely is / is not possible to set up.
I've never tried rolling my own MLM, but have used Majordomo, ListServe,
and for the last ten years or so, SmartList. They've all been hosted
by my ISP, so I haven't personally configured this aspect of a MLM;
SmartList uses something called "flist" to deliver the mail; it may
go through sendmail on its way, but I don't know, and I don't think
that's relevant to your question.
The ultimate answer to your last question is: yes, it is definitely
possible to set up a MLM to encourage DSNs to go to the MLM, not the
message author.
Jim
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 12:30:50 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E9D32C455
for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:30:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-87-180.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.87.180] helo=defaulttg3zjxw)
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CPoFt-0006I4-1R
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:30:49 -0500
Message-ID: <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 20:31:06 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-1, 03/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/3
X-Sequence-Number: 1812
Thanks very much Jim,
yes, the MLM's developer (Mailgust) indeed knows about the issue and the
need for better handling of bounces; I'm assuming the problem doesn't
exist when using smtp because the mlm has been coded suitably.
The mlm is still under development (Mailgust) so whilst waiting for more
development (!) I'm fishing around for a fix ...
In the meantime I've contacted my hosting support to see if they can
help at all.
Presumably of course, if my account is subject to a certain smtp
restriction then i also shouldn't be able to use sendmail directly to
get round this, but this 'bounce error' problem is the only apparent
hurdle in the way.
Lee
Jim Osborn wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 5:53:11PM +0000, lee wrote:
>
>
>>I'm running a mailing list manager using the sendmail binary for
>>outgoing mail, because smtp is too restricted to make the 300+
>>zubscriber base workable.
>>
>>Trouble is, when people mail the list they get a 'personal' mail
>>delivery error from the mail daemon if there happen to be any dead or
>>over quota addresses on the list at that time. Using smtp (on smaller
>>lists) seems not to do this.
>>
>>
>
>Others here can probably quote the RFCs on this better than me, but I'll
>offer my limited opinion. First, those errors you mention should never
>go to the message author, but should instead go to the envelope sender,
>or return-path, which should be the MLM. I don't know if this is a
>sendmail/smtp issue or just an issue with your MLM. Then again, there
>are plenty of sites that misdirect DSNs even with the MLM set up right.
>
>
>
>>So, is there a specific request I can send to the hosting support to get
>>these mail delivery errors specifically directed to an admin address?
>>ie, 'if a delivery error is generated when someone has originally mailed
>>to xyzlist then forward to admin@xyz rather than the original sender' ....
>>
>>
>
>Here's a sampling of the headers this list, list-managers, emits:
>
> From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Nov 4 10:00:21 2004
> Return-Path:
> X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
> Message-ID: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com>
> Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:53:11 +0000
> From: lee
> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
> Subject: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
> Sender: list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com
>
>A site would have to be really misconfigured to send DSNs to the From:
>address with all that info at hand. You might check to see what your
>current MLM is sending in the way of headers.
>
>
>
>>I'm asking here before contacting the host in case any of you have tried
>>this before and found it definitely is / is not possible to set up.
>>
>>
>
>I've never tried rolling my own MLM, but have used Majordomo, ListServe,
>and for the last ten years or so, SmartList. They've all been hosted
>by my ISP, so I haven't personally configured this aspect of a MLM;
>SmartList uses something called "flist" to deliver the mail; it may
>go through sendmail on its way, but I don't know, and I don't think
>that's relevant to your question.
>
>The ultimate answer to your last question is: yes, it is definitely
>possible to set up a MLM to encourage DSNs to go to the MLM, not the
>message author.
>
>Jim
>
>
>
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Nov 5 06:29:37 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from postoffice7.mail.cornell.edu (postoffice7.mail.cornell.edu [132.236.56.22])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F53C32C1AA
for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 06:29:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [128.253.64.63] (murmer.cit.cornell.edu [128.253.64.63])
by postoffice7.mail.cornell.edu (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id iA5ETTUq028756
for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:29:30 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: tco2@postoffice7.mail.cornell.edu
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <20041104175259.77B9832C3C9@mycroft.greatcircle.com>
References: <20041104175259.77B9832C3C9@mycroft.greatcircle.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:30:16 -0500
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
From: Todd Olson
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Archive-Number: 200411/4
X-Sequence-Number: 1813
Hi Lee
>Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:53:11 +0000
>From: lee
>To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
>Subject: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
>Message-ID: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com>
>
>
>hello everyone,
>
>I'm running a mailing list manager using the sendmail binary for
>outgoing mail, because smtp is too restricted to make the 300+
>zubscriber base workable.
>
>Trouble is, when people mail the list they get a 'personal' mail
>delivery error from the mail daemon if there happen to be any dead or
>over quota addresses on the list at that time. Using smtp (on smaller
>lists) seems not to do this.
If you are refering to using entries in the sendmail aliases file
to implement a mailing list, such as
mylist-l: john@a.com, jim@b.com, ....
Then to make sure the envelope address gets set correctly
so that mail deamon errors go to the list owner you should add at
least the following line to the aliases file
owner-mylist-l: your@name.com
For further details see p264 of 3rd ed of the book "Sendmail" by
Costales & Allman (O'Reilly publisher)
Many MLMs have three lines in the sendmail aliases file
mylist-l: "| posting_handling_program"
owner-mylist-l: "| error_handling_program"
mylist-l-request: "| forwarding_to_human_for_assistance_program"
Details vary depending on the MLM
Regards,
Todd Olson
Cornell University
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 08:10:59 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from parrot.squawk.com (parrot.squawk.com [68.142.11.110])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF2832C1CA
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 08:10:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (nscifi.squawk.com [199.74.151.5])
by parrot.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AC7C25B2C0
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:10:56 -0500 (EST)
Received: by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix, from userid 500)
id 75A3D55789; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:10:56 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
From: Nick Simicich
To: List Managers
In-Reply-To: <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com>
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com>
<20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7)
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:10:56 -0500
X-Archive-Number: 200411/5
X-Sequence-Number: 1814
On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 15:31, lee wrote:
> Thanks very much Jim,
>
> yes, the MLM's developer (Mailgust) indeed knows about the issue and the
> need for better handling of bounces; IOct 31 15:12:14 parrot postfix/smtp[17424]: 8017225B411: to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=12, status=sent (250 OK id AABA2LUFVAE7DCG2)
Oct 31 21:47:04 parrot postfix/smtp[22537]: 7D00825B42C:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=23,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2MJ7GANU9492)
Nov 3 22:33:40 parrot postfix/smtp[16244]: 6414325B3BA:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=170,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2VJ2VAH4PK3A)
Nov 4 08:22:43 parrot postfix/smtp[24274]: 5DAEE25B39D:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=11,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2WMKAA2RWXEA)
Nov 4 08:23:52 parrot postfix/smtp[24277]: 1335A25B394:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=8,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2WMMGAB4GJ22)
Nov 4 11:06:56 parrot postfix/smtp[26381]: BBE2125B3B2:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=30,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2WW68AMCD4FJ)
Nov 4 15:26:57 parrot postfix/smtp[29978]: C42BB25B369:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=7,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XEESA5USSKJ)
Nov 4 15:30:11 parrot postfix/smtp[29985]: F27CD25B3B6:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=33,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XELUAQTT6PS)
Nov 4 15:33:00 parrot postfix/smtp[29974]: EA00C25B3B4:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=11,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XER3AR45HWA)
Nov 4 15:38:15 parrot postfix/qmgr[27247]: 8A0AF25B3BB:
from=,
size=4025, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Nov 4 15:38:22 parrot postfix/smtp[30198]: 8A0AF25B3BB:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=7,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XE35AS8BQYA)
Nov 4 15:41:38 parrot postfix/smtp[30279]: D34E125B3B3:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=13,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XE98A59FUGS)
Nov 4 15:48:44 parrot postfix/qmgr[27247]: 8491825B3C2:
from=,
size=2579, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Nov 4 15:48:46 parrot postfix/smtp[30099]: 8491825B3C2:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=2,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XFPQAHKFST2)
Nov 4 16:17:15 parrot postfix/smtp[30908]: 0EAA025B3D0:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=19,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XHC3AGG9Q3J)
Nov 4 16:58:26 parrot postfix/smtp[31553]: 96C8725B3C3:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=8,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XKSBASRYEQJ)
Nov 4 18:14:28 parrot postfix/smtp[32506]: 4D42325B3D2:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=41,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XP8VA2XLFZA)
Nov 4 18:26:23 parrot postfix/smtp[32696]: 352C725B3DD:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=8,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XQW6AQ6MMDS)
Nov 4 19:02:42 parrot postfix/smtp[855]: 9684A25B3E8:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=11,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XS29A4H6AHJ)
Nov 4 19:03:03 parrot postfix/smtp[841]: CFF7625B3E5:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=21,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XS3VAU88UQ2)
Nov 4 19:03:19 parrot postfix/smtp[828]: C958E25B3EA:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=27,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XS4FAMT4UB2)
Nov 4 19:16:36 parrot postfix/qmgr[27247]: BE86E25B3EB:
from=,
size=2866, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Nov 4 19:16:43 parrot postfix/smtp[1053]: BE86E25B3EB:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=7,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XTVJAJDP6FA)
Nov 4 19:24:42 parrot postfix/smtp[1155]: 6CC2D25B479:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=21,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XUCHAANBW4J)
Nov 4 19:32:34 parrot postfix/smtp[1381]: 8071F25B3E2:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=13,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XUS6AK7QCVA)
Nov 4 19:36:54 parrot postfix/smtp[1510]: 9295725B3F7:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=9,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2XU3FAF3CSSJ)
Nov 4 21:42:55 parrot postfix/smtp[3215]: EDD1F25B3BB:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=12,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2X4FNAYHD2UJ)
Nov 5 11:36:56 parrot postfix/qmgr[27247]: 0F28925B4B9:
from=,
size=4430, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Nov 5 11:37:01 parrot postfix/smtp[14689]: 0F28925B4B9:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=5,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2ZMBMAM72TYA)
Nov 5 15:15:40 parrot postfix/smtp[17613]: ED35A25B4C1:
to=, relay=mx.nyc.untd.com[64.136.20.83], delay=6,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA2ZZ5LAEYA85S)
Nov 5 20:03:45 parrot postfix/smtp[21566]: B409725B4DB:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=9,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA22JZSAFE2L5A)
Nov 6 16:19:18 parrot postfix/smtp[6114]: 7373C25B4E1:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=7,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA24R8XAY5DXEJ)
Nov 6 17:23:49 parrot postfix/smtp[7060]: 204E625B4DB:
to=, relay=mx.lax.untd.com[64.136.28.83], delay=8,
status=sent (250 OK id AABA24VZXAEH22HJ)
> 'm assuming the problem doesn't
> exist when using smtp because the mlm has been coded suitably.
>
> The mlm is still under development (Mailgust) so whilst waiting for more
> development (!) I'm fishing around for a fix ...
The fix is to use the proper options on sendmail. There is the "From"
header in the mail and the envelope sender. Are you using the "-t"
option to tell sendmail to read the headers? If so, it might be putting
the original author as the envelope sender. That would be your problem,
then. If you are invoking sendmail directly, you can set the envelope
sender with the -f command line option. So,
-f list-bounces-go-here@example.com
more or less as the first thing that is past your sendmail command
should work. The other alternative is that you think that the original
message author should go in -f and you have parsed it out and put it
there. No, that is the envelope sender.
What is it you could not do with smtp? I presume that this is a
delivery program that mailgust uses and not some other program.
> In the meantime I've contacted my hosting support to see if they can
> help at all.
>
> Presumably of course, if my account is subject to a certain smtp
> restriction then i also shouldn't be able to use sendmail directly to
> get round this, but this 'bounce error' problem is the only apparent
> hurdle in the way.
If they are running real sendmail, then the mail program may refuse to
allow you to set an envelope user unless you are a "trusted sendmail
user". This is stupid since it is simply obfuscatory and not any real
security - if they let you script (and they must if they are letting you
install beta software) then it doesn't matter - with the right scripting
you can do anything with the smtp port directly - I see that from my
sendmail man page (which is installed as man 8 sendmail in Fedora, even
when you run postfix), it takes the option, but adds a
"X-Authentication-warning" header. You probably don't care about that.
If you are going to do your bounces yourself, you might be interested in
something I did a while back - I modified the old majordomo bulk mailer
program to do verp.
http://majordomo.squawk.com/majordomo/bulk-mailer/ - the userid and
password needed are both majordomo.
--
Blog: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/blogger.html
Atom: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/atom.xml
RSS: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/atom.rdf
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 12:56:10 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A394032C150
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 12:56:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-84-230.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.84.230] helo=defaulttg3zjxw)
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CQu52-0007nR-La
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:56:09 -0500
Message-ID: <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 20:56:09 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
In-Reply-To: <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/6
X-Sequence-Number: 1815
Many thanks Nick and also Jim and Bob for your advice so far;
You've all mentioned VERP and related issues, which I am doing my best
to understand. Even though what I talk about below seems to ignore my
understanding of VERP, I'd be grateful if you could stick with me ...
Regarding your smtp question, Nick; I believe mailgust has been
'temporarily/partly' coded to just absorb any bounces which come back to
the mlm. It's acknowledged that the software is incomplete in this area,
including my issues with the sendmail sending.
I was talking to the developer yesterday although he is committed to
paid work for now, and he asked a question which indeed I have
considered but chose to ignore so far - if I am having trouble with mail
delivery errors going directly to list zubscribers, how could the
current mailgust state be causing this? ie, the list posting address
appears in the list headers as the Return-Path, but I know for sure that
the bounces I and others are experiencing are definitely not being
remailed out through the list.
Anyway ... he wasn't implying the software was otherwise fine in this
area; he was simply questioning the effort i was putting into an
apparent train of logic.
I also understand from what I have learnt here and elsewhere that the
From
header in the eventual mail envelope may be the crux of the issue,
rather than my understanding of the visible Return-Path header.
So .... the easiest thing for me to do here is just show you (below) the
latest mail I have sent to the mailgust support list. If you understand
php and have the time and interest, it shows the current state of my
'efforts' and limits of understanding!
In case it's relevant, I don't have command line / Unix / shell access
to set up or configure anything such as sendmail; all I have is cPanel
type access to my hosting.
Many thanks here everyone !
Lee
_The mail referred to above_ : -
Thanks again! I appreciate your replies.
I actually did some coding yesterday on a test install of mailgust, bearing in mind I have no grasp of php whatsoever ... I basically decided to copy all the coding I could find from the 'Set Reply-To' list function to make a new setting called 'Set Return-Path'. I was 'partly' successful in this and my aim is to offer 2 options where the Return-Path is left alone, or it can be set to the main list-admin email address. This is already defined (?) in gorum/lang/lang_en.php as
$lll["settings_adminEmail"]="Admin email";
The files I changed were sendcron.php, maillist.php, digestcron.php, gorum/zmail.php and lang/lang_en.php
At one point I had something 'different' to previously working, where the Return-Path was certainly changed but not under my control (!) and it had become (generic here) mydomain@www.myhost'smaildaemon.com
Using a filter to forward any error mails to the list-admin address this did indeed appear to be working, although not as planned as described above.
I then did further adjustments to gorum/zmail.php where I feel any further coding is needed, and I lost my way. I am out of my depth now due to not understanding what I am doing.
Kjell, the things you are mentioning appear to be in the gorum/zmail.php file, so I would be hugely grateful if you or anyone else could have a look at mine at (txt file version) http://www.incelsite.com/mg3/gorum/zmail.txt which is currently (I think) still in the standard mailgust coding.
I am also offering txt files at relevant url's of all the other files mentioned above.
Many, many thanks for any help with my experiment! I appreciate it may be pointless but I feel it's important to at least get control over the Return-Path to see what difference it may make.
Lee
------------------------------------------
Nick Simicich wrote:
> The fix is to use the proper options on sendmail. There is the "From"
>
>header in the mail and the envelope sender. Are you using the "-t"
>option to tell sendmail to read the headers? If so, it might be putting
>the original author as the envelope sender. That would be your problem,
>then. If you are invoking sendmail directly, you can set the envelope
>sender with the -f command line option. So,
>
>-f list-bounces-go-here@example.com
>
>more or less as the first thing that is past your sendmail command
>should work. The other alternative is that you think that the original
>message author should go in -f and you have parsed it out and put it
>there. No, that is the envelope sender.
>
>What is it you could not do with smtp? I presume that this is a
>delivery program that mailgust uses and not some other program.
>
>
>
>>In the meantime I've contacted my hosting support to see if they can
>>help at all.
>>
>>Presumably of course, if my account is subject to a certain smtp
>>restriction then i also shouldn't be able to use sendmail directly to
>>get round this, but this 'bounce error' problem is the only apparent
>>hurdle in the way.
>>
>>
>
>If they are running real sendmail, then the mail program may refuse to
>allow you to set an envelope user unless you are a "trusted sendmail
>user". This is stupid since it is simply obfuscatory and not any real
>security - if they let you script (and they must if they are letting you
>install beta software) then it doesn't matter - with the right scripting
>you can do anything with the smtp port directly - I see that from my
>sendmail man page (which is installed as man 8 sendmail in Fedora, even
>when you run postfix), it takes the option, but adds a
>"X-Authentication-warning" header. You probably don't care about that.
>
>If you are going to do your bounces yourself, you might be interested in
>something I did a while back - I modified the old majordomo bulk mailer
>program to do verp.
>
>http://majordomo.squawk.com/majordomo/bulk-mailer/ - the userid and
>password needed are both majordomo.
>
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 14:17:32 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from shuttlex.radparker.com (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BBF632C18D
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 14:17:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78])
by shuttlex.radparker.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E32E9616D;
Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:22:02 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 16:17:36 -0600
From: Al Iverson
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com>
In-Reply-To: <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archive-Number: 200411/7
X-Sequence-Number: 1816
lee wrote:
>
> Many thanks Nick and also Jim and Bob for your advice so far;
>
> You've all mentioned VERP and related issues, which I am doing my best
> to understand. Even though what I talk about below seems to ignore my
> understanding of VERP, I'd be grateful if you could stick with me ...
>
> Regarding your smtp question, Nick; I believe mailgust has been
> 'temporarily/partly' coded to just absorb any bounces which come back to
> the mlm. It's acknowledged that the software is incomplete in this area,
> including my issues with the sendmail sending.
>
> I was talking to the developer yesterday although he is committed to
> paid work for now, and he asked a question which indeed I have
> considered but chose to ignore so far - if I am having trouble with mail
> delivery errors going directly to list zubscribers, how could the
> current mailgust state be causing this? ie, the list posting address
> appears in the list headers as the Return-Path, but I know for sure that
> the bounces I and others are experiencing are definitely not being
> remailed out through the list.
Lee, could you put an example of a message posted to your list on a
website somewhere? With full headers, saved as a text file? All received
lines/from lines/return path/etc. visible. Curious to see what this
might reveal.
Regards,
Al Iverson
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 15:48:12 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E652E32C188
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 15:48:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-84-230.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.84.230] helo=defaulttg3zjxw)
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CQwlY-000Cng-1b
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 18:48:12 -0500
Message-ID: <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 23:48:16 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com>
In-Reply-To: <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/8
X-Sequence-Number: 1817
Thanks for your interest Al;
Sorry about the wonky line wrap in my last mail to this list.
Sure, below is a url showing the message source as shown in Mozilla
Thunderbird on a mailgust mail sent out using the sendmail binary. The
mail was originally emailed into the list by me from Thunderbird. The
particular list is set to make the Reply-To header show the list
address, although that's not relevant here. The Mailgust install used
here is the standard latest release, free from my current 'experimental
coding'.
I might also add here that Thunderbird shows the same form of
From
header at the top of all message sources I look at, irrespective of any
mailing list or individual emailer, but from what I understand this
isn't the
From
header I / we have referred to earlier ?? ...
anyway, here's the url of the message source:
http://www.incelsite.com/fullheaders.txt
Many thanks,
Lee
Al Iverson wrote:
> Lee, could you put an example of a message posted to your list on a
> website somewhere? With full headers, saved as a text file? All
> received lines/from lines/return path/etc. visible. Curious to see
> what this might reveal.
>
> Regards,
> Al Iverson
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 16:06:07 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from shuttlex.radparker.com (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 862B432C18F
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:06:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78])
by shuttlex.radparker.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ED29616D;
Sun, 7 Nov 2004 18:10:39 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 18:06:12 -0600
From: Al Iverson
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com>
In-Reply-To: <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archive-Number: 200411/9
X-Sequence-Number: 1818
lee wrote:
>
> Thanks for your interest Al;
>
> Sorry about the wonky line wrap in my last mail to this list.
>
> Sure, below is a url showing the message source as shown in Mozilla
> Thunderbird on a mailgust mail sent out using the sendmail binary. The
> mail was originally emailed into the list by me from Thunderbird. The
> particular list is set to make the Reply-To header show the list
> address, although that's not relevant here. The Mailgust install used
> here is the standard latest release, free from my current 'experimental
> coding'.
>
> I might also add here that Thunderbird shows the same form of
> From
> header at the top of all message sources I look at, irrespective of any
> mailing list or individual emailer, but from what I understand this
> isn't the
> From
> header I / we have referred to earlier ?? ...
Yeah, same on Mozilla for me, for any message I check, so I don't think
it's having an impact on the issue.
> anyway, here's the url of the message source:
>
> http://www.incelsite.com/fullheaders.txt
If I understand correctly, the issue is bounces being distributed to
list members, yes?
Is the list locked so that only members can post? Verified by email address?
Can you post one of those bounces to a text file, just like you did with
the example post?
My thoughts would be to change the return path as to not be the list
posting address, or to change the list so that only members may post.
If you're still seeing the issues after that happens, then it feels like
you have some list members with a wonky MTA or MUA that is doing some
bad stuff. I see that often enough on our mailings (avg 1-2 mil a day)
that we had to put some extensive automation in place to handle
misdirected bounces, as well as the usual other garbage like out of
office replies.
It could also be caused by some poorly-designed spam filter, that's
helpfully trying to bounce perceived spam, but is parsing the headers
wrong and sending it to the wrong person (though in a situation like
that, there's really not a right person to send it to; a spam filter
like that does little more than pound innocents with misdirected spam
and bounces).
In a situation like this your only recourse may be to hunt down and
remove the offending list members.
Regards,
Al Iverson
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 16:21:04 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B5232C19D
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:20:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-84-230.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.84.230] helo=defaulttg3zjxw)
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CQxHA-000DDb-Da
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:20:53 -0500
Message-ID: <418EBBE8.50904@btinternet.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:20:56 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com> <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com>
In-Reply-To: <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/10
X-Sequence-Number: 1819
hello again Al and everyone,
(see * below for my replies)
Al Iverson wrote:
>
> If I understand correctly, the issue is bounces being distributed to
> list members, yes?
> * Yes, that's right.
> Is the list locked so that only members can post? Verified by email
> address?
* Yes, indeed so.
>
>
> Can you post one of those bounces to a text file, just like you did
> with the example post?
* I don't have one to hand at present, but could generate one. They
appear to be the same kind of mail delivery failure notifications that
you would receive from a personal mail to a dead or over quota address,
for example. The majority of the error mails I'm referring to appear to
be posted by the mail daemon on the list hosting's site. A smaller
amount appear to come directly from the mail daemon of the failing address.
>
> My thoughts would be to change the return path as to not be the list
> posting address, or to change the list so that only members may post.
* Yes, I'm trying to create the option to change the Return-Path (or
at least force in an overall specific one for all lists) with my
previously described efforts. It's these coding efforts I've reached a
dead end with because I have taken my non-knowledge of php to the utmost
limit !
> If you're still seeing the issues after that happens, then it feels
> like you have some list members with a wonky MTA or MUA that is doing
> some bad stuff. I see that often enough on our mailings (avg 1-2 mil a
> day) that we had to put some extensive automation in place to handle
> misdirected bounces, as well as the usual other garbage like out of
> office replies.
* Absolutely, once I've achieved my aims above I can assess the
issue (I'm already aware of) where some mail servers don't acknowledge
the actual desired Return-Path.
>
> It could also be caused by some poorly-designed spam filter, that's
> helpfully trying to bounce perceived spam, but is parsing the headers
> wrong and sending it to the wrong person (though in a situation like
> that, there's really not a right person to send it to; a spam filter
> like that does little more than pound innocents with misdirected spam
> and bounces).
* Sure, presumably a real possibility.
* Many thanks again for anything further,
* Lee
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 16:54:19 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from imo-m27.mx.aol.com (imo-m27.mx.aol.com [64.12.137.8])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A47B32C1EB
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:54:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Drcoz@aol.com
by imo-m27.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id 8.9f.516f6782 (15887);
Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:54:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from dc-ink2 (wbar6.wdc2-4.16.161.253.wdc2.dsl-verizon.net [4.16.161.253]) by air-id08.mx.aol.com (v103.7) with ESMTP id MAILINID82-3e0f418ec3b499; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:54:12 -0500
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:54:50 -0500
From: "Derek Cosby"
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
To: "Al Iverson"
Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com
In-Reply-To: <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com>
Message-ID: <418EC3DA.503@aol.com>
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <418E9F00.9090502@mnjazz.com> <418EB440.4080406@btinternet.com> <418EB874.9060008@mnjazz.com>
X-Mailer: AOL Communicator (20030919.3 Win)
Organization: Home
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii
X-AOL-IP: 4.16.161.253
X-Archive-Number: 200411/11
X-Sequence-Number: 1820
He how to I get out of this group...
Al Iverson wrote on 11/7/2004, 7:06 PM:
> lee wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks for your interest Al;
> >
> > Sorry about the wonky line wrap in my last mail to this list.
> >
> > Sure, below is a url showing the message source as shown in Mozilla
> > Thunderbird on a mailgust mail sent out using the sendmail binary. The
> > mail was originally emailed into the list by me from Thunderbird. The
> > particular list is set to make the Reply-To header show the list
> > address, although that's not relevant here. The Mailgust install used
> > here is the standard latest release, free from my current 'experimental
> > coding'.
> >
> > I might also add here that Thunderbird shows the same form of
> > From
> > header at the top of all message sources I look at, irrespective of any
> > mailing list or individual emailer, but from what I understand this
> > isn't the
> > From
> > header I / we have referred to earlier ?? ...
>
> Yeah, same on Mozilla for me, for any message I check, so I don't think
> it's having an impact on the issue.
>
> > anyway, here's the url of the message source:
> >
> > http://www.incelsite.com/fullheaders.txt
>
> If I understand correctly, the issue is bounces being distributed to
> list members, yes?
>
> Is the list locked so that only members can post? Verified by email
> address?
>
> Can you post one of those bounces to a text file, just like you did with
> the example post?
>
> My thoughts would be to change the return path as to not be the list
> posting address, or to change the list so that only members may post.
>
> If you're still seeing the issues after that happens, then it feels like
> you have some list members with a wonky MTA or MUA that is doing some
> bad stuff. I see that often enough on our mailings (avg 1-2 mil a day)
> that we had to put some extensive automation in place to handle
> misdirected bounces, as well as the usual other garbage like out of
> office replies.
>
> It could also be caused by some poorly-designed spam filter, that's
> helpfully trying to bounce perceived spam, but is parsing the headers
> wrong and sending it to the wrong person (though in a situation like
> that, there's really not a right person to send it to; a spam filter
> like that does little more than pound innocents with misdirected spam
> and bounces).
>
> In a situation like this your only recourse may be to hunt down and
> remove the offending list members.
>
> Regards,
> Al Iverson
>
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 17:13:34 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED33F32C34C
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:13:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-84-230.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.84.230] helo=defaulttg3zjxw)
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CQy68-000Esf-F1
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 20:13:33 -0500
Message-ID: <418EC841.8000205@btinternet.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 01:13:37 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: How to leave a list here
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/12
X-Sequence-Number: 1821
Derek or anyone else,
You should be able to leave any list on this majordomo installation by
visiting the link below and using the options accordingly :
http://www.greatcircle.com/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=greatcircle.com?user=&passw=&func=login
Lee
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 19:37:51 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from parrot.squawk.com (parrot.squawk.com [68.142.11.110])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E4B32C1C0
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:37:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from scifi.squawk.com (nscifi.squawk.com [199.74.151.5])
by parrot.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B823625B305
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 22:37:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: by scifi.squawk.com (Postfix, from userid 500)
id A749E55794; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 22:37:23 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
From: Nick Simicich
To: List Managers
In-Reply-To: <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com>
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com>
<20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com>
<1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
<418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7)
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 22:37:23 -0500
X-Archive-Number: 200411/13
X-Sequence-Number: 1822
On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 15:56, lee wrote:
> Many thanks Nick and also Jim and Bob for your advice so far;
>
> You've all mentioned VERP and related issues, which I am doing my best
> to understand. Even though what I talk about below seems to ignore my
> understanding of VERP, I'd be grateful if you could stick with me ...
Um, you need to get a basic understanding of sendmail before you do this
stuff. Return-path is a header that is set by the MTA (i.e., sendmail)
as part of the final delivery and it is simply a conventional way to
preserve the RFC821 envelope address. Setting it before you resend
something is likely useless. It is a way to make this visible to the
mail recipient and will otherwise likely be ignored.
> Regarding your smtp question, Nick; I believe mailgust has been
> 'temporarily/partly' coded to just absorb any bounces which come back to
> the mlm. It's acknowledged that the software is incomplete in this area,
> including my issues with the sendmail sending.
So the answer is that "smtp" is, in fact, mailgust code? But, for some
reason, you have decided to call sendmail directly.
> I was talking to the developer yesterday although he is committed to
> paid work for now, and he asked a question which indeed I have
> considered but chose to ignore so far - if I am having trouble with mail
> delivery errors going directly to list zubscribers, how could the
> current mailgust state be causing this? ie, the list posting address
> appears in the list headers as the Return-Path, but I know for sure that
> the bounces I and others are experiencing are definitely not being
> remailed out through the list.
Did you understand what I wrote? Please read RFC821 - there are newer
ones, but that one is on point here. When you understand that there is
a MAIL FROM and a RCPT TO address, then consider that what you put in
the mail header has nothing to do with the delivery of the mail.
(With the exception of using the -t option to sendmail - when you do
that, sendmail parses the header, once, and fills in the envelope.)
> Anyway ... he wasn't implying the software was otherwise fine in this
> area; he was simply questioning the effort i was putting into an
> apparent train of logic.
> I also understand from what I have learnt here and elsewhere that the
> From
> header in the eventual mail envelope may be the crux of the issue,
> rather than my understanding of the visible Return-Path header.
No, unless the mail recipient's system is badly broken, the From header
has nothing to do with anything.
I'll try again:
1. There is an envelope. The envelope is how one sendmail talks to
another - the "MAIL FROM:" "RCPT TO: address,
and not to anything in the headers. There are exceptions, but these
mostly occur when people who think that they understand e-mail but don't
(like Lotus or Microsoft) write products. Good MTAs (sendmail, postfix,
qmail) send their bounces to the RFC821 envelope (although more and more
people are simply sucking up bounces because of rampant origin
forgeries).
> So .... the easiest thing for me to do here is just show you (below) the
> latest mail I have sent to the mailgust support list. If you understand
> php and have the time and interest, it shows the current state of my
> 'efforts' and limits of understanding!
I've read it, and I think you are manipulating the "Return-Path:"
header. You are wasting your time. Return-Path might be parsed by -t
from sendmail, (I have no way of testing this) but it seems wrong headed
to do that. If you read RFC822 (obsolete but still on point for this)
4.3.1, it talks about making a route path available here - this is the
older mindset where sendmail and RFC822 would gateway from addressing
domain to addressing domain - say from a uunet gateway to the external
world to a private mail system - and the Return-Path would record this,
so that the final recipient would have a fighting chance of replying.
This is broken in today's world, but there is one point:
> This field is added by the final transport system that
> delivers the message to its recipient. The field is intended
> to contain definitive information about the address and route
> back to the message's originator.
Since the RFC821 address would have to be massaged at any gateway to
allow a bounce, simply copying the envelope origin to this header is the
way it works. But putting it into mail that you are sending is
meaningless - expect it to be ignored by the final delivery MTA.
> In case it's relevant, I don't have command line / Unix / shell access
> to set up or configure anything such as sendmail; all I have is cPanel
> type access to my hosting.
If you have the ability to set up scripting, you have the ability to get
an interactive shell on your web host. You just don't know how. :-)
If you are calling sendmail directly to forward the e-mail that is being
generated or forwarded by mailgust, you need to override the origin.
Using the owner- magic might work. Specifying what you want as an
argument to sendmail is more likely to work.
>From the sendmail man page:
> -fname Sets the name of the ``from'' person (i.e., the envelope sender
> of the mail). This address may also be used in the From: header
> if that header is missing during initial submission. The enve-
> lope sender address is used as the recipient for delivery status
> notifications and may also appear in a Return-Path: header. -f
> should only be used by ``trusted'' users (normally root, daemon,
> and network) or if the person you are trying to become is the
> same as the person you are. Otherwise, an X-Authentication-
> Warning header will be added to the message.
I want to point out that whereas the envelope sender might be put into
Return-Path, this does not imply that Return-Path will be copied into
the envelope sender. I could be wrong.
Again, the simple answer is that if you specify the address you want the
bounces to go to, then you don't need to worry.
--
Blog: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/blogger.html
Atom: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/atom.xml
RSS: http://majordomo.squawk.com/njs/blog/atom.rdf
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 7 19:49:48 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FD6832C178
for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:49:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-80-244.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.80.244] helo=defaulttg3zjxw)
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CR0XL-000HuJ-FH
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 22:49:48 -0500
Message-ID: <418EECDC.9080605@btinternet.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 03:49:48 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
In-Reply-To: <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/14
X-Sequence-Number: 1823
thanks Nick,
All noted and I will look into all of it.
As for the smtp thing; mailgust offers mail sending either by entering a
chosen smtp server in the settings (with authentication if needed) or by
selecting another option to use the sendmail binary (if available) on
the actual host machine. Mailgust apparently 'absorbs' the bounces when
using smtp, but not when using the sendmail binary.
lee
Nick Simicich wrote:
>On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 15:56, lee wrote:
>
>
>>Many thanks Nick and also Jim and Bob for your advice so far;
>>
>>You've all mentioned VERP and related issues, which I am doing my best
>>to understand. Even though what I talk about below seems to ignore my
>>understanding of VERP, I'd be grateful if you could stick with me ...
>>
>>
>
>Um, you need to get a basic understanding of sendmail before you do this
>stuff. Return-path is a header that is set by the MTA (i.e., sendmail)
>as part of the final delivery and it is simply a conventional way to
>preserve the RFC821 envelope address. Setting it before you resend
>something is likely useless. It is a way to make this visible to the
>mail recipient and will otherwise likely be ignored.
>
>
>
>>Regarding your smtp question, Nick; I believe mailgust has been
>>'temporarily/partly' coded to just absorb any bounces which come back to
>>the mlm. It's acknowledged that the software is incomplete in this area,
>>including my issues with the sendmail sending.
>>
>>
>
>So the answer is that "smtp" is, in fact, mailgust code? But, for some
>reason, you have decided to call sendmail directly.
>
>
>
>>I was talking to the developer yesterday although he is committed to
>>paid work for now, and he asked a question which indeed I have
>>considered but chose to ignore so far - if I am having trouble with mail
>>delivery errors going directly to list zubscribers, how could the
>>current mailgust state be causing this? ie, the list posting address
>>appears in the list headers as the Return-Path, but I know for sure that
>>the bounces I and others are experiencing are definitely not being
>>remailed out through the list.
>>
>>
>
>Did you understand what I wrote? Please read RFC821 - there are newer
>ones, but that one is on point here. When you understand that there is
>a MAIL FROM and a RCPT TO address, then consider that what you put in
>the mail header has nothing to do with the delivery of the mail.
>
>(With the exception of using the -t option to sendmail - when you do
>that, sendmail parses the header, once, and fills in the envelope.)
>
>
>
>>Anyway ... he wasn't implying the software was otherwise fine in this
>>area; he was simply questioning the effort i was putting into an
>>apparent train of logic.
>>I also understand from what I have learnt here and elsewhere that the
>>From
>>header in the eventual mail envelope may be the crux of the issue,
>>rather than my understanding of the visible Return-Path header.
>>
>>
>
>No, unless the mail recipient's system is badly broken, the From header
>has nothing to do with anything.
>
>I'll try again:
>
>1. There is an envelope. The envelope is how one sendmail talks to
>another - the "MAIL FROM:" "RCPT TO:getting your list mail."
>
>Then there is the header of the mail, which is mostly secondary to
>everything. It contains hints and clues about how a mail user agent is
>to flag the mail, some trace information, and some other stuff. Pretty
>much nothing there matters to either the mail delivery, or to the bounce
>of non-deliverable mail.
>
>Good mail transfer agents return bounces to the MAIL FROM:<> address,
>and not to anything in the headers. There are exceptions, but these
>mostly occur when people who think that they understand e-mail but don't
>(like Lotus or Microsoft) write products. Good MTAs (sendmail, postfix,
>qmail) send their bounces to the RFC821 envelope (although more and more
>people are simply sucking up bounces because of rampant origin
>forgeries).
>
>
>
>>So .... the easiest thing for me to do here is just show you (below) the
>>latest mail I have sent to the mailgust support list. If you understand
>>php and have the time and interest, it shows the current state of my
>>'efforts' and limits of understanding!
>>
>>
>
>I've read it, and I think you are manipulating the "Return-Path:"
>header. You are wasting your time. Return-Path might be parsed by -t
>from sendmail, (I have no way of testing this) but it seems wrong headed
>to do that. If you read RFC822 (obsolete but still on point for this)
>4.3.1, it talks about making a route path available here - this is the
>older mindset where sendmail and RFC822 would gateway from addressing
>domain to addressing domain - say from a uunet gateway to the external
>world to a private mail system - and the Return-Path would record this,
>so that the final recipient would have a fighting chance of replying.
>
>This is broken in today's world, but there is one point:
>
>
>
>
>> This field is added by the final transport system that
>> delivers the message to its recipient. The field is intended
>> to contain definitive information about the address and route
>> back to the message's originator.
>>
>>
>
>Since the RFC821 address would have to be massaged at any gateway to
>allow a bounce, simply copying the envelope origin to this header is the
>way it works. But putting it into mail that you are sending is
>meaningless - expect it to be ignored by the final delivery MTA.
>
>
>
>>In case it's relevant, I don't have command line / Unix / shell access
>>to set up or configure anything such as sendmail; all I have is cPanel
>>type access to my hosting.
>>
>>
>
>If you have the ability to set up scripting, you have the ability to get
>an interactive shell on your web host. You just don't know how. :-)
>
>If you are calling sendmail directly to forward the e-mail that is being
>generated or forwarded by mailgust, you need to override the origin.
>Using the owner- magic might work. Specifying what you want as an
>argument to sendmail is more likely to work.
>
>>From the sendmail man page:
>
>
>
>> -fname Sets the name of the ``from'' person (i.e., the envelope sender
>> of the mail). This address may also be used in the From: header
>> if that header is missing during initial submission. The enve-
>> lope sender address is used as the recipient for delivery status
>> notifications and may also appear in a Return-Path: header. -f
>> should only be used by ``trusted'' users (normally root, daemon,
>> and network) or if the person you are trying to become is the
>> same as the person you are. Otherwise, an X-Authentication-
>> Warning header will be added to the message.
>>
>>
>
>I want to point out that whereas the envelope sender might be put into
>Return-Path, this does not imply that Return-Path will be copied into
>the envelope sender. I could be wrong.
>
>Again, the simple answer is that if you specify the address you want the
>bounces to go to, then you don't need to worry.
>
>
>
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Nov 8 00:55:51 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC41B32C40A
for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 00:55:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-80-67.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.80.67] helo=defaulttg3zjxw)
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CR5Jj-000Lzr-1H
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 03:56:03 -0500
Message-ID: <418F34A6.8010507@btinternet.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:56:06 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: mailing with sendmail binary / errors
References: <418A6C87.2070600@btinternet.com> <20041104194912.GA16075@eskimo.com> <418A918A.6010300@btinternet.com> <1099843855.2393.2141.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com> <418E8BE9.5010406@btinternet.com> <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
In-Reply-To: <1099885042.2393.2565.camel@quickdraw.squawk.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0445-2, 04/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/15
X-Sequence-Number: 1824
Just a few more thoughts on this, as I move increasingly towards giving up.
I need someone who understands php and sendmail, and is willing to look
at the 2 unmodified mailgust (mlm) files below with reference to all this.
http://www.incelsite.com/mgtest/sendcron.txt (normally a php file)
http://www.incelsite.com/mgtest/gorum/zmail.txt ( " "
" )
Please see * below for my comments.
Nick Simicich wrote:
>Return-path is a header that is set by the MTA (i.e., sendmail)
>as part of the final delivery and it is simply a conventional way to
>preserve the RFC821 envelope address. Setting it before you resend
>something is likely useless. It is a way to make this visible to the
>mail recipient and will otherwise likely be ignored.
>
>
* Ok, I understand and appreciate this. I have abandoned my blind coding
attempts to change the return-path header within mailgust.
>
>Did you understand what I wrote? Please read RFC821 - there are newer
>ones, but that one is on point here. When you understand that there is
>a MAIL FROM and a RCPT TO address, then consider that what you put in
>the mail header has nothing to do with the delivery of the mail.
>
>
* I've tried to read up in some relevant places, but I fail to understand much of it.
>(With the exception of using the -t option to sendmail - when you do
>that, sendmail parses the header, once, and fills in the envelope.)
>
>
* Are things like -f and -t sendmail arguments which I have read quite a
lot about? Presumably these would be / are coded somewhere in the
mailgust php code. If you mean instead that I have to set something up
in sendmail I don't understand anyway how that would work for a specific
address or program. It sounds to me like an action to impact on how
sendmail works generally.
>There is an envelope. The envelope is how one sendmail talks to
>another - the "MAIL FROM:" "RCPT TO:getting your list mail."
>
>* Ok; It is this 'list bounce address' I am trying and wanting / needing to set.
>
>
>Return-Path might be parsed by -t from sendmail, (I have no way of testing this) but it seems wrong headed to do that.
>
>
* Would this be due to the mlm coding or a sendmail options setting?
Looking through the mailgust sendcron.php and gorum/zmail.php files
shows things like -f but not -t.
Please bear in mind again I have no understanding of php and very little
understanding of unix commands.
>
>If you have the ability to set up scripting, you have the ability to get
>an interactive shell on your web host. You just don't know how. :-)
>
>
* I still believe I don't have shell access to my hosting without
specifically asking for it or getting my host to do it.
If you are calling sendmail directly to forward the e-mail that is being
generated or forwarded by mailgust, you need to override the origin.
Using the owner- magic might work. Specifying what you want as an
argument to sendmail is more likely to work.
* ok sure; by owner- magic do you mean including an alias of the form:
list-owner: xyz@abc.com ?
From what I have read, the style of my aliases will not work with
this. The info I have read implies this works with an 'include' alias
and a file of addresses.
My aliases follow either the form:
list@abc.com: path_to_mlm_cron_file
or
list@abc.com: list_mailbox, path_to_mlm_cron_file
> <> -fname Sets the name of the ``from'' person (i.e., the envelope sender
> of the mail). This address may also be used in the From: header
> if that header is missing during initial submission. The enve-
> lope sender address is used as the recipient for delivery status
> notifications and may also appear in a Return-Path: header. -f
> should only be used by ``trusted'' users (normally root, daemon,
> and network) or if the person you are trying to become is the
> same as the person you are. Otherwise, an X-Authentication-
> Warning header will be added to the message.
>
>* ok sure, but again, where and how to do this? In 1 or more mlm files?
>
>
Again, the simple answer is that if you specify the address you want the
bounces to go to, then you don't need to worry.
* yes, that's totally what I want to do !!
Thanks again,
Lee
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
scanned by lee's virus software. outbound message found to be clean.
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 14 04:30:23 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC0DA32C362
for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 04:30:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-85-118.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.85.118] helo=[127.0.0.1])
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CTJVP-000BNo-4q; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 07:29:19 -0500
Message-ID: <41974F9F.6050809@btinternet.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 12:29:19 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com, Mailgust
Subject: user unknown ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0446-2, 11/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/16
X-Sequence-Number: 1825
hello everyone,
In your experience is it ok to treat a bounce error as shown below as
'user unknown' or does it literally imply a temporary problem with an
otherwise active address ?
550 [SUSPEND] Mailbox currently suspended - Please contact correspondent directly
Thanks,
Lee
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 14 05:41:26 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from www-s34d2.ununetworks.com (www-s34d2.ununetworks.com [66.36.228.29])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB7232C2C0
for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 05:41:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host81-157-85-118.range81-157.btcentralplus.com ([81.157.85.118] helo=[127.0.0.1])
by www-s34d2.ununetworks.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43 (FreeBSD))
id 1CTKdA-000CRG-1b
for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 08:41:24 -0500
Message-ID: <4197608A.9090702@btinternet.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 13:41:30 +0000
From: lee
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Windows/20040803)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Subject: Re: using sendmail / SMTP / errors
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0446-2, 11/11/2004), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - www-s34d2.ununetworks.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - greatcircle.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [26 6]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - btinternet.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Archive-Number: 200411/17
X-Sequence-Number: 1826
hello again Todd and everyone who has recently helped and advised me,
Just a little update for you to consider/react to where relevant. My new
replies here are prefixed with *:
Todd Olson wrote:
>>
>>BTW if you manually send mail to list-admin@incelsite.com
>from your personal account, does it get there?
>>
>>* Yes, that's fine; it's a genuine mailbox address which I can and do
access.
>>------------------------------------------
>>
>
>>>>He (Mailgust developer) has confirmed that the current mailgust
'bodge' in SMTP is indeed to return bounces to the list
address.
>
>>
>>
>>so no more guessing needd on this one.
>>
* Further, I have discovered from him that the same thing happens
regardless of whether mailgust is set to send using SMTP
or the sendmail binary. This would still not explain my original
problem though, where using sendmail on a colleague's
domain was causing bounces to go to the original email poster. Along
the lines that you and others have tried to tell me,
I think Chuck (developer) has said this depends on whether the host's
mail server is set to recognise use of the -f option
as included / offered in the Mailgust coding. We are currently trying
to get the host to answer this question:
"Is it allowed to call sendmail from a PHP script using the following
format: /usr/sbin/sendmail -i -f sender@address.com ?"
(I am currently unclear as to what -i does)
Good news though; Chuck has told me/us how to change Mailgust's
zmail.php file to successfully allow the Return-Path:
to be defined as a desired address other than the list address, which
indeed appears to work and appear in the headers,
presumably subject to whether -f is allowed on the specific mail server:
from zmail.php: (** used here to highlight the new line, apologies for
some line wrap corruption)
function
gmail($from,$to,$subject,$body,$html=0,$att=0,$vfrom="",$vto="",$vcc="",$vdate="",$mid="",$retpath="",$repto="",$addhead="",
$host="localhost",$port="25",$client="",$smtpu="",$smtpp="",$rewrite_head="")
{
global
$zmailOk,$zmailHost,$zmailUser,$zmailPass,$zmailMailer;
if ($vdate=="")
$vdate=date('D, j M Y H:i:s O');
**$retpath= "list-owner@domain.com";**
if
($retpath) {
$vfrom=$from;
$from=$retpath;
}
if (!$vfrom)
$vfrom=$from;
$message="";
$eol="\r\n";
//Mail header
-----------------------------------
My understanding is this
SMTP is the protocol. Stands for Simple Mail Transfer Protocol.
Sendmail is a program. It speaks SMTP amoung other things and can route
mail from
one place to another.
Similar programs are postfix, qmail, exim
I'm quite confused about what you are calling 'SMTP' ... since you
indicate you are not talking about the protocol.
Have you any pointers to what you are talking about so we can get on
the same page?
* yes, this is my lack of understanding here. I think these are my
current beliefs:
1) When Mailgust sends mail using its setting to use the
sendmail/postfix/qmail/exim binary, mailgust is calling that binary
on the host machine by means of a php file. This may or may not be
subject to remailing restrictions dependent on how the
host has set things up. The binary is indeed part of the outgoing mail
server itself, which then sends the mail(s) on to
the recipient using an SMTP protocol connection.
2) When Mailgust sends mail using its setting to use an available SMTP
server, mailgust is using an SMTP protocol to reach
that mail server much like an email client would. This may or may not
be subject to remailing restrictions dependent on how
that host has set up the mail server. That server then sends the
mail(s) on to the recipient using an SMTP protocol
connection.
As far as I currently understand, the possible advantages of 1) over 2)
above may be:
a) A faster connection resulting in swifter mail delivery. I appreciate
that any ultimate mail delivery is dependent on the
processing performance of the recipient POP server.
b) It may be a way to avoid SMTP remailing restrictions imposed by a
mail server's host.
Lee
--
*The latest fine-tuning of * LEE'S FREE MUSIC STATION
*means
even bigger hits, pop and dance - less fillers than ever before*
From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Nov 14 07:22:46 2004
X-Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C64932C33B
for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 07:22:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [24.147.79.192] (h000a278f559e.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.147.79.192])
by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP
id <20041114152231011006vp7te>; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:22:31 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: simsoc@simsoc.org
Message-Id:
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 10:22:25 -0500
To: list-managers@greatcircle.com
From: John Watkins
Subject: Re: user unknown ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Archive-Number: 200411/18
X-Sequence-Number: 1827
At 12:29 PM +0000 11/14/04, lee wrote:
>In your experience is it ok to treat a bounce error as shown below as 'user unknown' or does it literally imply a temporary problem with an otherwise active address ?
>
>550 [SUSPEND] Mailbox currently suspended - Please contact correspondent directly
I publish an Ezine so the problem is probably different with than with an open-ended list serv.
With the Ezine, I file these replies and periodically check to see if they occur for consecutive issues. If they do, the name is either dropped or some other action is taken to confirm continued interest by the individual.
With an interactive listserv, it seems the problem would identify itself more quickly because each message would or would not produce the same bounce error.
If it's a person you want to "keep," your choice of follow-up will be different than if you don't care about losing them.
--
There ARE simple SOLUTIONS to major public problems
For proof, take advantage of our FREE trial membership
email your name and zip code to trial@simsoc.org.
John Watkins Founder and Creative Director
The Simple Society Alliance for Human Empowerment
379 Amherst Street #234, Nashua, NH 03063 http://simsoc.org